Germar Rudolf
Was Auschwitz Liberated or Merely Occupied by the Red Army? 

In the book for which Elie Wiesel is most famous, namely Night (Bantam paperback edition, 1960), which is recommended reading in many public schools across the globe, Wiesel paints an horrendous picture of life in Auschwitz from April 1944 to January 1945 when he was there. Although many hundreds of thousands of Jews were supposedly gassed there during this time, Wiesel makes no mention of gassings or gas chambers anywhere in his book, as Jürgen Graf and Robert Faurisson have pointed out to us. (Cf. the table compiled by J. Graf at the end of R. Faurisson, "Witnesses to the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz," in: G. Rudolf (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust, 2nd. ed., Theses & Dissertations Press, Chicago, IL, 2003, p. 144, He does however claim to have seen flames from the crematory chimneys and Dr. Mengele wearing a monocle. Both claims are clearly lies, since the Auschwitz crematories, fired with coke, could not produce flames that could travel trough 15 m of flue and 30 m of chimney (see Carlo Mattogno, "Flames and Smoke from the Chimneys of Crematoria," The Revisionist 2(1) (2004), pp. 73-78,

When the Russians were about to overrun Auschwitz in January 1945, both Elie and his father "chose" to go west with the retreating 'Nazis' and SS rather than be "liberated" by America's greatest ally. They could have told the whole world about Auschwitz within days--but, both Elie and his father as well as countless thousands of other Jews chose instead to trek west with the 'Nazis' on foot at night in the middle of one of the coldest winters and continue working for the defense of the Reich thereafter. In effect, they chose to collaborate.

Some of Wiesel's exact words in Night are (p. 78):

"The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him [the father] entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. 'Well, what shall we do, father?' He was silent. 'Let's be evacuated with the others,' I told him."

Elie's tale in this regard is corroborated by other "survivor" accounts including that of Primo Levi. In Levi's book "Survival in Auschwitz," we have his words for January 17th, 1945:

"It was not a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the instinct of the flock if I had not felt so weak: fear is supremely contagious, and its immediate reaction is to make one try to run away."

But he's talking here about running away with the 'Nazis'--and not 'Nazis' who were mere rank and file party members but supposedly the worst of the worst. He's talking here about running away with the same 'Nazis' and SS who had supposedly carried out the greatest imaginable mass murders of Jews and others in the entire history of the universe. He's talking about running away with the people who supposedly did the actual killings of thousands daily for several years. But, according to his own words he would probably have gone with them nonetheless, except that he was not feeling good that day; he was feeling weak. The "fear" that he overcame was clearly fear of the Russians and not the 'Nazis;' there is no mention of fear of what the 'Nazis' and SS might do when the evacuees entered the forest or sometime later.

The choices that were made here in January 1945 are enormously important. In the entire history of Jewish suffering at the hands of gentiles what moment in time could possibly be more dramatic than this precious moment when Jews could choose between, on the one hand, liberation by the Soviets with the chances to tell the whole world about the evil 'Nazis' and to help bring about their defeat--and the other choice of going with the 'Nazi' mass murderers and to continue working for them and to help preserve their evil regime. In the vast majority of cases, they chose to go with the 'Nazis'.

The momentous choice brings Shakespeare's Hamlet to mind:

"To remain, or not to remain; that is the question:" to remain and be liberated by Soviet troops and risk their slings and rifles in order to tell the whole world about the outrageous 'Nazis'--or, take arms and feet against a sea of cold and darkness in order to collaborate with the very same outrageous 'Nazis'. Oh what heartache--ay there's the rub! Thus conscience does make cowards of us all.

So what was the final score--here a drum roll seems fitting in the background as Vanna White comes onto the stage with the sealed envelope and the answer to the great riddle. The envelope is torn open and the choice is--drum roll again--according to Levi himself 800 choose to remain in Auschwitz, but 20,000 choose to go and collaborate with the 'Nazi' mass murderers. Wow! Such a surprise--already!

We see the same deliberate pro-'Nazi' collaboration in the "survivors" from Schindler's List. In their well-known story, as the Russians were about to overrun Plaszow just thirty miles down the road to the east from Auschwitz in November 1944, Schindler and more than a thousand Jews chose to go west with the retreating 'Nazis' rather than hang back and be "liberated" by the Soviets. Some even spent the next several weeks at Auschwitz--and none were gassed, not even in the movie. The hoax has certainly had its day. If there had been any kind of extermination of Jews at all in Auschwitz, all of the Jews in Cracow and Plaszow would have known about it as well. All of the Jews who went west in effect also denied the Holocaust, albeit only with their hands and feet. The Jews themselves were the first true Holocaust deniers, and it is about time they get all the credit they deserve.

The rather simple analysis of Holocaust survivor tales I have given here is an easy to understand refutation of the hoax in general. I urge all readers to reexamine the survivor accounts for themselves but critically and systematically. The internet with search engines like Google allows anyone to analyze literally thousands of survivor accounts in seconds for major flaws of the type I have discussed. Just search for keywords like "evacuation" or combinations of words like "holocaust survivor Auschwitz."

An Implied Message

There is an implied but unstated message in Holocaust revisionism which we should address because that message is so shocking that it is actually a major hurdle for our work in general and, therefore, we should deal with it. When we say the Holocaust story is not true, I believe we are, in effect, also saying that there is something seriously wrong with America. Most Americans firmly believe that America is still far and away the most wonderful, most nearly perfect society in every possible way that the world has ever seen. If the Holocaust is not true, then there must be something seriously wrong with America because the accepted story is almost universally embraced by the media, press and institutions generally. Since America is so wonderful, the revisionists must therefore be wrong--or so the pseudologic goes.

The Real Holocaust

 Japanese and German women and children were murdered by the US by the most excruciatingly horrible means imaginable--by roasting them alive. If the 'Nazis' had murdered people in gas chambers, although criminal it would nonetheless have been humane and painless and even civilized compared to what Americans actually did even when, in the very last months of the war, there was no real danger to the US. To this day in America, there is still no sense of shame or apology. Please do not be taken in by the false argument that it was the Germans who started the bombing of civilian targets and therefore have nothing to complain about. It was the British who began the deliberate bombing of civilian targets already in May of 1940, to which Germany, after much restraint, only responded in kind in September of 1940. The Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor--which at that time was NOT a part of the U.S., but a mere colony!--was clearly aimed only at military targets without any consultation with the women and children of Hiroshima or Nagasaki or Tokyo or any other Japanese city.

Adapted from: "Poison Gas Über Alles," by Friedrich Paul Berg, The Revisionist, 1(1) (2003), pp. 37-47 (


When the inmates of various camps went west with the German armed forces in early 1945--some of them forced, some voluntarily--many of them died in what is today called "death marches." What is forgotten today, however, is the fact that millions of German civilians were also on "death marches" during those months. The invading Red Army wreaked havoc in eastern Europe. They mercilessly deported and/or mass-murdered all actual and suspected collaborators, including many inmates of German concentration camps, most of whom had, after all, helped Germany's war effort. Reaching the eastern parts of Germany, almost all soldiers of the Red Army engaged in mass-rapings, in plundering, looting, and killing what ever they could find. Eventually, more than two million Germans lost their lives during those events and the death marches resulting from them (see, e.g., A.M. de Zayas, Terrible Revenge. Ethnic Cleansing of East European Germans, 1944-1950,; Antony Beevor, The Fall of Berlin 1945, Hence, most victims of the "death marches" were not victims of the SS, but victims of the chaos of collapsing Germany, caused by the invading Red Army in the east and the carpet bombings of the U.S. and Britain.

So, was Auschwitz liberated by the Red Army? Could anyone be liberated by this army? The answer is, of course, NO. Auschwitz was occupied by the Red Army, as were all other camps. As was the Ukraine, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Bulgaria. The harsh regiment of the SS in the camps and the German occupational forces in most of those countries was replaced by the terror of the Red Army, which was far worse than anything the Germans ever did. Everybody knew what was awaiting them, so millions of Ukrainians and civilians of the Baltic states tried to move west with the retreating Germans since 1943.

The inmates of Auschwitz behaved no different. They, too, knew what was awaiting them, so most of those who were given the option to leave with the Germans or to stay, chose to leave with the Germans rather than to be terrorized by the Soviets. This is also proven by the fact that uncounted thousands of those Auschwitz inmates who went west with the Germans survived the war and are able to tell their sometimes quite twisted tale today. There are claimed to have been at least one million such Holocaust survivors in 2000. Calculating back to 1945, there must have been some five million such survivors at that time. Go figure! (see G. Rudolf, "Holocaust Victims: A Statistical Analysis," in G. Rudolf (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust, 2nd. ed., Theses & Dissertations Press, Chicago, IL, 2003, pp. 209-211,

Even the British Government knew what was awaiting those to be "liberated" by the Red Army. On February 29, 1944, the British Ministry of Information sent the following note to the higher British clergy and to the BBC:

I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:
It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.
But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently.
We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.
We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them - and ourselves - from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.
Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of the "Corpse Factory," and the "Mutilated Belgian Babies," and the "Crucified Canadians."
*Your* cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.
*Your* expression of belief in such may convince others.
I am, Sir, Your obedient servant
The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.
(Source: Edward J. Rozek, Allied Wartime Diplomacy, John Wiley & Sons, New York 1958, pp. 209f.; Rozek gives as his source: Poland, Official Government Documents, Vol. LVI, Doc. 78)
What unfolded in the following years was exactly that: atrocity propaganda to cover up for the outlandish crimes against humanity committed not only by the Red Army, but also by the western allies.
The real liberation of Auschwitz--a liberation from distortions, exaggerations, lies, and censorship laws--has yet to come.

Germar Rudolf
Chicago January 27, 2005
Castle Hill Publishers
PO Box 257768
Chicago, IL 60625

ph: ++1(773) 769 1121
fax: ++1(773) 409-5570


Top of Page | Home Page

©-free 2005 Adelaide Institute